Joe rogan goes nuts on Steroids and stuff. HIs arguement is that getting Matt Hughes in the same weight class as...everyone else has a major disadvantage, and argues what will happen when we have nano technology or other forms of performance enhancements.

They should be legal, as far as the government goes, but if I were making the rules for any sort of athletic competition I would prohibit their use. Admittedly this is just a bias. I would rather people had the chance to compete without doing steroids, even if it means that the level of achievement isn't as great. But someone else might prefer seeing Barry Bonds hit a homer every other time he goes to the plate, or some 'roided-out monster lift a city bus over his head.

"should it be legal , I dont care as long as I dont have to pay for the repercussions , or see the fallout , but is it smart .. not for me .... "

You always pay. Do you think that people using steroids would agree not to get medical care if they got abscesses from the injection, liver damage, whatever? Not a chance. Great reason for helmet laws in my book.

Sounds like everyone is "pro choice" on this issue. I agree... I would never participate in this phenomenon but those who want to, go for it, because they will see harm befall them at the end of the game.

Last edited by mikex1337 on Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think one of the best ideas I have heard is people should be allowed to take anything they wish--BUT they have to publish and document their exact regimen.

If the argument is "the fans and advertisers don't care" then lets test it.

(because by and large the fan DO seem to care)

Might be a whole new avenue of marketing for drug manufactures--

"In the blue trunks, fighting with 300 units of ultra pure HGH and a mix of Maxi-Muscle 500 steroids and Ultra-Rage's new blend of morphine level pain killers and psychotic anger inducers."

All kidding aside, I see performance enhanceing drugs as an ananthma to athletics.

Testing should be rigourious, random, by surprise and with the best equipment possible--failure means being banded for LIFE.

Random and through drug testing should be a regular part of the game--you should never know when and where they will show up to test you.

It should be started early in a players career--say college--so they have a long record to compare things to/against.

Plus you show up early on game day, piss into a cup and give a little blood, and if you pass, you take the field.

Hell for the kind of money these guys make they should have little to bitch moan and whine about.
A full ride athletic schlorship in college can easily be worth more than a $100,000--depending on the school A LOT MORE.
And people in the pro's can earn MILLIONS on the field and millions MORE in endorsements.

Heck actors are put on restriction all the time---not allowed to ride their motorcycles and do dangerious things while shooting a movie--why should athletes be any different????

I have a buddy that works for a computer firm and he gets tested all the time--for A LOT less money then many athletes make.

In the case the Bonds--if pitchers are juiceing--then the solution is NOT--"i'll just cheat too" the solution is drop a dime on the pitchers.

If people won't do what it right---then it should cost them---maybe if your caught dopeing/cheating you not only lose your job--but you have to REPAY the money on your contract--and if you can't pay it back--you go to jail like any other deadbeat.

Most organizations already have various "ethics" clauses in there contracts--why not add a "dopeing clause as well?

What is it that makes sports interesting to watch? I'm not sure I know the answer to that in general. Would we be just as interested to watch trained animals play football? Baseball? I guess I want to identify with the players in some way, and the less human they are the harder that's going to be. Seems to me that applying technology to the substrate (as opposed to training methods or tools used in the game, like raquets) is trending towards not-quite-human competitors. I don't care if athletes take steroids or whatever, but in that case I also really don't care as much how well they can perform in their sport. If we're not going to insist on athletes being regular humans off the proverbial street, then why not let the animals fight, too. I'd like to see a 900 pound bear in the UFC heavyweight division, without claws or teeth of course. Not sure he'd stop with the tapout, though. Could get messy even without claws and teeth. Bears are strong (I've played a little with a 3 year-old black bear). Would have to pay the refs more, give them tranquilizer guns maybe.

One of the reason people used to pay such interest in sports is...at least in part...they they could connect with the athletes.

As our basketball players and football players become more and more biological sports the less people can see themselevs in them.

I can't get that mentally/emotinally invloved in the exploits of a guy that stands 7'1 or a football player that stands 6'6 weighs in at 280 and can run a fast fast fast 40--I just can't relate to that....so I really don't care much what they do...I'll watch a game--just can't muster up the interest I had when I was a kid.

It may be one of the reasons the fan base is starting to erode in several sports---and why games like soccer are gaining in popularity----lots of soccer players are pretty "normal" people in terms of physique.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum